Social Policy - Putting People First Essay Example for Free

Social Policy Putting People First Essay For this assignment l have been asked to identify and examine a social policy and to make reference to a political ideology of welfare, discuss the contributions of social work, service user and carer’s experiences to the policy document. To achieve this l will discuss ‘Pettigrew’s model of strategic change’ which will help to summarise the key elements considered when looking at any specific policy. (Public Administration Management, 1999, pp. 494-507) Firstly to discuss the context, the governmental approach with New Labours/Third Way philosophy behind the policy â€Å"Putting People First†, the principles and why it was implemented, how this fits with what we know about New Labours commitment to finding solutions to societal issues from a socialist type theorist view. Also to discuss the Process, how it was put together and implemented. But most crucially l will discuss the Content, the implications to service user’s and carer’s experiences to the policy and its impact, in conjunction with the social work contribution to the policy and its own implications to welfare provision. Old age, seen as a burden viewed by governments as a cost to society, a value of each person has been imposed by way of what a local authority is willing to pay, â€Å"Older people are seen as past their best, no longer productive, no longer contributing to the economy and therefore a burden, a drain on the states resources† (Thompson, 2006, p.100). Demography along with increased expectations, put demands on an already faltering, aged service, people living longer with complex needs due to new technology, plus services out of touch with the needs and expectations of today. A well educated generation with the aptitude to convey their requirements, rather than the acceptance of being grateful for whatever they can get. In an age of 60 being the new 40, people wanting, expecting and hoping for a new type of consideration in regard to any help they may need. Using these arguments government issued statements that social care as it stands could not possibly continue and if not redressed, would not survive; something had to change. Driven by figures forecast that social care costs in the future were to rise and by â€Å"2022, 20% of the English population will be over 65 and by 2027, the number of over 85yr olds will have increased by 60%†(Department of Health, 2008,p.1). â€Å"Intolerance of inequality was the prevailing mood and New Labour policies reflected this†(Blakemore Griggs,2007, p.274), rethinking the aged Old Labour ideology of state provision and a well-known system of need, assessment, criteria and services provisioned on the outcome of eligibility, and provisioned by a limited statutory service were not reflecting good practice in terms of equality. In recognition of the rising cost of old age, New Labour in 2007 introduced the Putting People First policy as a â€Å"shared vision and commitment to the transformation of adult social care† and stated that it was to â€Å"set the new direction for adult social care for the next ten years or more† (DH) (2008), and has even been suggested by Alcock 2008 as being the most sweeping transformation of adult social care since the 1990’s community care act. Putting People First superseded the government white paper â€Å"our health, our care, our say – a new direction for community services (Department of Health, 2006), which gave an insight of what was to come and shared with it some of the radical thinking behind the governments new ‘third way’ philosophy. Putting People First was designed to implement a new way of delivering services through commissioning, personal budgets, recognising and utilising alternative methods of care provision such as family care, community support groups, voluntary sector and partnership working. These commissioned services can be partly funded via alternative funding streams such as lottery, voluntary and charities so reducing the states contribution. â€Å"Ultimately every locality should seek to have a single community based support system focussed on the health and wellbeing of the local population. Binding together local Government, primary care, community based health provision, public health, social care and the wider issues of housing, employment, benefits advice and education/training† (Department of Health, 2008, p.2), working collectively in four areas; â€Å"Universal Services, Early Intervention Prevention, Social Capital, Choice Control†(Department of Health, 2008 p.17). To illustrate where this policy fits with New Labour/Third Way, we can return to â€Å"early academic development of social policy and where Britain was closely allied to the political development of Fabianism† (Alcock, 2008, p.2). Fabians were â€Å"politicians and academics† who concerned themselves with â€Å"influencing governments† through â€Å"academic research and analysis† into how this should influence welfare reforms whilst pertaining the government’s responsibility (Alcock, 2008, p.2). Labour following WWII introduced much Fabian inspired reform’s using academic knowledge and research on social problems, closely followed by the Beveridge report and substantial change within state provision. Going against right wing critics who argued against state provision, and the New Right/Neo Liberalism who said that â€Å"state intervention merely drove up the cost of public expenditure†, furthermore developed a country who had â€Å"no incentive to protect themselves† consequently become totally reliant on government meeting all need (Alcock, 2008,p.9). Tony Blair became labour party leader in 1994, and continued along a political path instigated by the previous party leader John Smith who had â€Å"commissioned a review on social justice to look at past approaches to social policy†, where three methods became apparent: â€Å"The deregulators who favoured private markets over public provision†; â€Å"The levellers – supporters of old style social democratic justice† but the favoured style of social policy were the; â€Å"Investors who linked social justice to economic growth within a market economy† (Alcock, 2008, p.190). The â€Å"investor approach became central to the third way rhetoric† (Alcock, 2008, p.190) and won an election in 1997 for a New Labour who had discarded many of the state welfare commitments of â€Å"Old Labour approach of tax and spend in dealing with public services†(Blakemore Griggs, 2007,p.266). This third way was to recognise the more â€Å"complex make-up of modern societies†, from this â€Å"What Counts is What Works† was drawn from work by Anthony Giddens â€Å"a close advisor to Blair† (Alcock, 2008, p.10). â€Å"Giddens views about social policy involved a reformulation of the goal of equality in terms of exclusion and inclusion† two terms used widely by New Labour, both driving home some suggestion of concern with â€Å"citizenship, community† and â€Å"poverty†. (Alcock, Daly Griggs, 2008, p.205) Alcock (2008) suggests the Third Way or middle way rhetoric was a common sense way of keeping all political theorist’s happy. But continues on to say that some key themes are apparent such as shifting welfare towards an activist style of provision, sharing responsibility, improved choice using alternatively funded providers, â€Å"extending the conservatives strategy of building a market in welfare provision† (Blakemore Griggs, p.268), but â€Å"rather than being a distinctive path between different trajectories, is instead a pick-and-mix assortment of different ideas†(ed Ellison Pierson 2003, p.73). Both Blair and Giddens disputed this middle ground ideology of pleasing all, but rather a response to a â€Å"changed world† with â€Å"traditional values† (Hudson Lowe, 2004, p.44) New Labour continued with the ideology of â€Å"service user participation, community based care, and a mixed economy of provision delivered via social care makers† as the way forward, with an emphasis on â€Å"accountability and performance whilst encouraging â€Å"participation† and â€Å"choice† for purchasers of services (Blakemore Griggs,2007, p.276/77), and â€Å"invested considerable faith in the value of more informed approach to policy making, viewing it as central to improving the quality of public services†(Hudson Lowe, 2004, p.222). This rethink of â€Å"community care towards social care† (Blakemore Griggs, 2007,p.232) from central government produced a set of guidance to every local authority to assess and procure their own individual responses on how to implement the titanic changes required in changing the face of service delivery long-term to â€Å"fit services around not people round services† (Alcock, Daly Griggs, 2008 p.279). There were huge expectations on individual councils to develop ways of implementing service user and carer involvement more than ever before; their vision being, that service users and carers were to be empowered to contribute at the earliest stages of the way services were best delivered within local authorities. On the back of Putting People First came a grant allocation and background papers with guidance to be considered when implementing the policy were all produced to steer the implementation of service delivery, one being, â€Å"Personalisation†(Department of Health, 2008), which took the idea of Putting People First further, and brought together Primary Care Trusts and social care into jointly funding a ‘personal budgets’ or ‘individual budgets’ with a â€Å"full range of relevant local statutory, voluntary and private sector organisations to be fully engaged†(Department of Health, 2007). Putting People First and Personalisation policies are intended to take people with needs through a hugely diverse process of self assessment, where the social worker is led by the citizen, recognised as a lead player in establishing their own person centred plan of care, where â€Å"the individual is best placed to know what they need and how needs are best met† (Carr, 2008, p.3). Having been fortunate to experience implementation of direct payments for many years first hand, l can only praise the opportunities it has created within a learning disabilities team. Initial concerns regarding any security experienced within old fashioned service style was soon forgotten as the person emerged with newly found control over their lives, fortunately with few drawbacks; administration being one, reduced by regular reviews along with some form of Brokerage system. Also providing continuity and matching people in terms of personalities, with the assurance of knowing who will come into their home and at time to suit the person, not the care provider. As for Personalisation l can only imagine how positive this next stage can be devoid of issues with institutionalised social workers, deskilled and pressurised to be inventive with huge funding panel limitations. Individual budgets present a Resource Allocation Process, from a combination of funding streams, allocated via self assessment and support plan with assistance from a professional. This optimistically changes the role of social work from being a gatekeeper and provider of services to a broker, navigator, designer and risk assessor who advocates a person’s wishes from a resource allocation process (Carr, 2008, p.17), enabled to find â€Å"new collaborative ways of workingtailored specifically to meet individual needs† compared to the sticky plaster approach (Carr, 2008, p.3). Putting People First is seen by some as an â€Å"opportunity to return to the traditional social work, of enabling people to achieve potential† (Carr, 2008, p.16). Social work has to be diverse in its approach as this impacts, which ever political party is in power, which ever political ideology is favoured at any one time the social worker â€Å"moves backwards and forwards like some never ending contest between two evenly matched tug-of-war teams†, however this does not suggest that the social worker remains â€Å"power-neutral†, for a social workers powers are exercised on behalf of the state they â€Å"reflect a view which are fundamentally political in their determination† (Drakeford, 2010, p.304). We may consider whether all wish to be empowered in this way, changing the way services have been provisioned could we be taking away the proverbial security blanket. It is recognised that â€Å"families provide a far greater proportion of care and emotional and financial support† (Hill Irving, 2009, p.262) and it is for the â€Å"social worker to recognise and support carers in their role, and help with enabling maintenance of a life beyond caring†(Carr, 2008, p.3), PPF recognises this by delivering the tools to ensure a carer is â€Å"encouraged to play an active part† by being in control of what works best for them not prescribed by local authorities (Barton, 2010, p.410). Beveridge â€Å"didn’t anticipate the tumultuous decline in heavy industry† and the subsequent â€Å"rise in paid women’s work† (Hill Irving, 2009, p.265), sadly informal care continues to be â€Å"seen at the top of this mixed economy of welfare† (Hill Irving, 2009, p.190). It is vital in recognising the â€Å"power differential between carers and professionals, meaning the carer’s perspective can easily be overlooked†, â€Å"in addition to their motivation being driven by love, duty and a sense of enduring commitment but are sometimes compelled to take on this role against their wishes (Barton, 2010, p.410/13). All this puts further strain on carers, trying to juggle a life other than caring; Putting People First seems to have acknowledged this by including the ‘individual budgets’ to carers. By looking after the carer, valuing their expertise, and offering alternative solutions, thus prevents hospital admissions and residential care, both of which come at a much higher cost to the economy. We have taken a look at the impact of a political ideology, how this is developed into policies which impact on society, but also how the changes in societal discourses forces governments into making sweeping changes across provision. For me ‘sharing responsibility’ basically sums up the Putting People First policy, for those who receive help to be considered active, valued and empowered citizens, accredited with the ability to take responsibility of amalgamating services to meet individual needs. This new commissioning type of services by local authorities will inevitably force its way into social work, consequently social workers being privatised and commissioned by local authorities, again taking responsibility away from the state. However we have to be sceptical regards the costs – both in financial terms and the personal impact of this direction, as funding is reduced, how much of this shared responsibility will actually fall on the unpaid carers. And to reflect Hudson Lowe’s (2004) argument around â€Å"rational choice theory† and whether a society is able to develop a â€Å"collective action† due to a self-absorbed nation and what â€Å"sense of duty† is evident in â€Å"society to exist at all† (Hudson Lowe, 2004, p190), this may become apparent as we move towards a society who can make best use of social capital. References Alcock, C, Daly, G Griggs, E (2008): â€Å"Introducing social policy†, 2nd ed. Essex: Pearson Education ltd Alcock, P, (2008): â€Å"Social Policy in Britain† 3rd ed. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan Barton, R. (2010): â€Å"The carers perspective† in Davies, M. (ed.) The Blackwell Blakemore, K Griggs, E, (2007): â€Å"Social policy an introduction†, 3rd ed. Berkshire: open university press Drakeford, M. (2010): â€Å"Social work and politics† in Davies, M. (ed.) The Blackwell Carr, S. (2008) personalisation : a rough guide (ed) social care institute for excellence, London Companion to Social Work. Oxford: Blackwell publishing Ltd Ellison, N Pearson, C, (2003): â€Å"Developments in British policy 2†, London: Palgrave Macmillan Hill, M Irving, Z, (2009): â€Å"Understanding social policy†, 8th ed. West Sussex: Blackwell publishing Hudson, J Lowe, S, (2004): â€Å"Understanding the policy process†, Bristol: The Policy Press Department of health Think Local Act Personal – Debbie’s story HM Government (2008)[online]. London: National Health Service. [Accessed15.03.2011]. Available at: http://www.thinklocalactpersonal.org.uk . Department of health Putting people First A shared vision and commitment to the transformation of Adult Social Care. HM Government (2008)[online]. London: National Health Service. [Accessed15.03.2011]. Available at: . Department of health Think Local Act Personal- social care transformation. HM Government (2008)[online]. London: National Health Service. [Accessed15.03.2011]. Available at: http://www.thinklocalactpersonal.org.uk . Department of Health (October 2008) Putting People First Transforming Adult Care [online]. London: National Health Service. [Accessed 15.03.2011]. Available at: . Department of health Putting people First – Working to make it happen. HM Government (2008)[online]. London: National Health Service. [Accessed15.03.2011]. Available at: . Department of Health (January 2006) Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services[online]. London: National Health Service. [Accessed 15.03.2011]. Available at: . Public Administration Management: An Interactive Journal(1999) 4, 4, pp. 494-507 Thompson, N. (2006) Anti-discriminatory Practice.4th ed., Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.